In theory yes. In practise, no. So far American companies have managed to copy the very basic stylistic components of Japanese Anime, but haven't got anywhere in emulating the deeper themes and cultural impact. Western anime, as opposed to the better Western Animation just comes across as feeling soulless. A good American Animation might take on themes and elements from Japanese Anime but it will retain its own distinct style. The world isn't so homogeneous yet that you can wholly transfer an art form from place to place.

Rack:In theory yes. In practise, no. So far American companies have managed to copy the very basic stylistic components of Japanese Anime, but haven't got anywhere in emulating the deeper themes and cultural impact. Western anime, as opposed to the better Western Animation just comes across as feeling soulless. A good American Animation might take on themes and elements from Japanese Anime but it will retain its own distinct style. The world isn't so homogeneous yet that you can wholly transfer an art form from place to place.

Oh yes, I remember the first time I ran into "Legend of the Overfiend," I had to adjust my top hat and monocle in order to maximally ponder the deep themes and cultural impact.

The animated ladies involved certainly experienced some deep themes, if you know what I mean, and they seemed to be getting impacted in quite the cultural fashion.

...seriously, Last Airbender is a pretty good show, and there's plenty of terrible anime that is objectively worse than it.

MailOrderClone:It bothers me that fantastic adventure shows like those listed in this article are becoming the exception, rather than the norm in anime production. Every season we get more and more series' set in modern Japanese high schools, held up by the dual crutches of moe and fanservice. Too many harem shows with bland male leads and cookie-cutter female casts pandering to fetishes. Too much vapid sex comedy. Too many plots that can be described as "cute girls talk and do cute things... and that's a wrap, folks!" But those seem to be the things that the Japanese viewership likes.

We in the west have a chance to do something different. Something better. To make shows that are actually worth airing, and worth watching. There are a few on television these days, and I encourage all of you to join me in seeking these shows out, watching them, and supporting them.

This is an attitude that really rubs me the wrong way. Moe and slice of life is hardly killing anime, and it's hardly as prolific as so many people think.

There are 4 out of 23 new anime shows in August could realistically fall under that definition. Almost all the rest are your traditional Shonen style action shows that are far more popular. I'm just firmly against the western thought process that if something is emotionally engaging or doesn't have explosions it's girly and no one should like it because we're MEN and we do MANLY things and watching moe makes me less MANLY. *electric guitar solo*.

It just bugs me in that people seem to have a problem that moe exists, ignoring that that it's really a few studios like Key and Kyoto Animation making it; and people seem to froth at the mouth despite that KyoAni and Key have been making this stuff for like 15 years. To me, Moe is a character style. Some is good (I like K-on for instance because it's chaste, more on this later), some is complete and utter shit (Miname-ke instantly springs to mind) but it containing these characters doesn't make it good or bad in my opinion.

I DO agree that fanservice has gotten far, far too rampant however. I just really can't take a show heavy on fanservice seriously (air-gear, highschool of the dead). Air-gear especially epitomizes this for me. The show was nothing but fanservice, the plot went off the rails sometime half way through the season and it really made little sense in the end. All it had was tits, sexy girls and "hilarious" scenes where the main character accidentally barges in on them naked. What a fresh gag, we haven't seen that before.

EDIT: Also, I don't believe anime can really be a "Region Only" sort of thing, yes it originated in Japan, but it has an almost stronger following in the west. Hell, things like Ghost in the Shell can almost be considered more of a "Western Show" then a Japanese show despite being made in Japan.

Anime is a Japaneese word for animation/cartoons.. Therefor, unless you are a Japaneese outside Japan, I really doubt you would be making anime's. It would just be, well.. Animation or Cartoons.

Incorrect.Per a DictionaryAnime is a style of animation originating in Japan that is characterized by stark colorful graphics depicting vibrant characters in action-filled plots often with fantastic or futuristic themes See here.

Anime is a STYLE that originated in Japan but isn't done exclusively in Japan.

If I make an Edo Style Wood Block print it is a ukiyo-e? Yes it is because it is a particular Style and as long as I follow that style then there is no problem.

American Cartoons as an mature medium died long ago and because of that have a childish tone to them. American Cartoons are themselves a Style.

Your Dictionary is incorrect. Anime isnt a style. . . Saying its a style would mean that its a certain way of drawing, but there are tons of ways to draw and as far as I recall they are all named something different.

The term is up for interpretation, one of the interpretations (A huge generalization) being in an american dictionary doesnt prove much of anything.

Avatar is a western cartoon, made as if it was a Japaneese cartoon.

That being said this is pointless to be drawn into an arguement over. So im quitting before it gets further.

So not only are you claiming Websters as wrong, along with a half dozen other dictionaries, and Wikipedia, but you're also making an absurd claim that makes Spirited Away not anime because it was made in Korea. Really, the country of origin is irrelevant. Where it is made had little to do with it being called Anime and more to do with the style that it follows. Your "definition" excluded 90% of what is considered Anime by the world.

Dastardly:Really, the only common defining feature for people is the fact that it comes from Japan... but they'll put the same label on American-made stuff that models the style. So we have to talk elements of visual style... but Dragonball Z looks nothing like Cowboy Bebop, when you get right down to it, so what defines this style?

This is a really good example.

Every anime from Japan has a different style to it. Each has it's own unique style because of how the animation is drawn out. Really any country can do anime just as well but what would be helpful of course is to label that anime from whom made it. So for Legend of Korra, we'd call it an American anime so people understand and not get gripes over it for whatever reason.

The Boondocks is an anime, but honestly it's an American anime. Even if an anime was to take place in Japan but was made from America, it would still be an American anime. If Europe made an anime that takes place in America, it wouldn't be an American anime it would be a European anime which makes no difference... the style resorts to anime period. People getting on others for this topic is very silly to me. It'd be like if I got on someone for saying 'Your chocolate candy bar originally came from the rain forest!' and ranted. So what if the ingredients came from the rain forest in order to make chocolate? It's chocolate sold in a country and that's what it is now.

The Boondocks is an interesting specimen for a couple reasons. It is decidedly created with an almost exclusive black cast, black producer, and black creative director. Historically the de-localization of the African people to the United States included culture annihilation, segregation, economic disparity, coupled with the emergence of strong African American leaders, there is every indication of "culture - inside of a culture", "counter-culture".

The animation "is in and of itself" a borrow from the Japanese animation style and for good reason. Clearly Aaron McGruder was influenced by both comics and the Japanese products that where coming to the states during the late 80's and 90's. The Japanese style was emergent post WW2 and is in and of itself a copy of the old American comic book. This allows the Boondocks a certain freedom in design due to the tropes of Japanese animation (visual communication of action, facial expression... on and on) and a loose irony of two groups of peoples that have emerged cultural art forms which are the direct result of a heterogeneous mixture of indigenous identity and culture, melding with prevailing identities and cultures.

The very framing of Boondocks is very much in the comic/manga approach both structurally, thematically, artistically (as art assets).

For every reason the Boondocks works, is decidedly why an "anime" of Squidbillies simply wouldn't. For me it comes down to what one is trying to convey to the audience, through character animations, action, spacial relationships. Boondocks utilizing the trope factory of Japanese animation, gives it a structure that lends itself to the stories as they are produced. Uncle Ruckus is a great example of a character that follows the "Gonk" trope of Japanese animation. Where as in Squidbillies we may be hard pressed to identify the "Gonk"... all the characters are "Gonks".

To try to get at "it", borrowing an approach and structure of one product is a good thing, when that structure lends itself to the narrative and information one wants to communicate.

Copying something just to copy a "style", appears more like dick-riding, an attempt to create an association of one product with the popularity of another product. Looking right at the Mass Effect anime on this one. We could probably look at the animatrix as well and call which ones worked and which ones didn't in the style, likely for thematic reasons alone.

It's a copy of style without any of the substance, any of the "character" that comes with the established art form.

I said it before and I'll mention it again. One cannot simply "copy" Jack Daniels. It is the proprietary process that goes into the product beyond simply fermenting some corn in an oak barrel. To get right scientific with it, no matter what one makes, the spectroscopy will reveal differences. Now what one makes will be corn whiskey, but it won't be Bourbon (by definition) and certainly not JD.

Chocolate is going to be the same thing. By your description I will associate it with the RPG Lost Odyssey. Made in the states... by a predominantly Japanese crew... it is a Japanese RPG. The ingredients are all Japanese.

Chocolate made with Mexican chocolate with Mexican sugar, spices, and milk from a Mexican cow will be different than chocolate out of Bovaria which imported it's chocolate from Mexico... all the other ingredients are different, the process is different, the proprietary "character" of the production is different. A connoisseur "easily" taste the difference. The taste of the people that the product is for is different. It's different. Can't help but be.

I would put this whole thing to the test...

wheel up to the local anime importer... plop into the dvd/blu-ray player 10 different shows/films from different places, have the audience check off a list as to where they think the animation was made... and I am confident that even the most mild of enthusiast could tell you with shrug... 80 percent accuracy where they were made. A collector? No contest, nearly 100 percent of the time. A really good study, would be able to tell you what parts of the animation where made where and by whom.

Can't get around it.

Products are reflections of the people and cultures that make em.

Copied shit looks, taste, feels, like it was made by someone interested in copying.

I have question on this topic. The classical cartoon Animaniacs probably wouldn't be considered an anime, but some parts where animated in Japan. Does that mean some parts of Animaniacs are anime but others are not?

Yes Korra is Anime, as well as say Martin Mystery.Cowboy bebop had a Jazz Soundtrack composed just for the show by a Japanese woman, but Jazz was invented in the West. Yet it's still referred too as Jazz.

Sis:Champagne can only be named champagne if it originates from the Champagne area. Anime can only be named Anime if it originates from the Japan. HOWEVER, that still doesn't mean that others aren't allowed to make it. They're just not allowed to name it so.

Agreed. Basically, American's can easily make something that very strongly resembles anime in every conceivable way, but it wouldn't technically be anime; just an American cartoon that looks like one. With that it mind, it really doesn't make the slightest damn difference.

I think everyone is forgetting one important detail that separates American Animation and Japanese Animation: Frame rates.American Animation is made to show at much higher frame rates than what is used on average for Japanese animation. This means that American Animation like Avatar and the Legend of Korra, while drawn in an Animesque style, have more fluid and higher quality animation than the average Japanese Anime. Consequently this also makes American Animation much more expensive to produce because they have to animate a whole lot more cels than their Japanese counterparts. A significant amount of Japanese Animation techniques come from the fact that Japanese Animation is produced on a lower budget with lower frame rates than American Animation, so much of the distinctive style of Japanese Anime is the result of the Japanese trying to make an enjoyable show while maintaining their budget. However since a lot of Animation for both America and Japan is now done by Korean companies, this makes much of the argument about what separates Japanese and American Animation a moot point.

I remember back in the late 80s and to early 90s that anime from japan was stated as "Japanese animation" and then around the mid 90s as "Japanime". If people are going to make a big deal on that anime can only be considered something from Japan and everything else is just cartoons, then maybe we should just go back to the two earlier terms, though starting to say words such as USAnime and Franime could sound a bit silly.

ATLOK is goddamn awesome. It was even better than the original Avatar. Both series were anime so i say yes. Americans can make anime. I loved the attention to detail and the overall quality of it. Few shows have that. The only other one i can think of is Hellsing Ultimate OVA.

Do we really need to be including more things into labels that already do a poor job of representing reality? Shouldn't we adjust language in the other direction of increasing acknowledgement of fine details and subtle differences?

Wanting to call western animation like Avatar "anime" seems to me like it stems from the idea that "anime" is better, which we should probably avoid. Personally, I think Japan's animation output aims higher than the west's animation fairly consistently, but that might not always be the case.

Actually, recent years seem to have shown signs that a reversal in that dynamic is happening now or might happen soon, so who knows?

The question I'd like to ask is: Why is this of such importance? What would being 'allowed' to call western animated TV Anime add that isn't already there?Unless you're trying to prove tu purists that everything can be Anime, but that seems like bust a useless and a lost cause. French wine connoisseurs will never admit that other countries could make good wine and people settled in the belief that only Japan can make Anime probably won't budge easily either.

I get the feeling from this article that 'earning' the right to the Anime label is seen like some ultimate goal to achieve, a turning point wherein international barriers in an entertainment form would fall apart?

The problem I see is merely this: the term Anime is a hollow, interchangeable word, if you say "Japanese animation" or "Japanese animated series" people will understand just as well what you have in mind. Like all words it was given this meaning of "animation produced in Japan" because it was basically a loan-word from Japanese where it was also a loan-word, from English(or French, there is relatively little way of verifying concretely).Saying "Anime" instead of "Japanese animation", to me, amounts to the same as saying "Udon" instead of "Japanese noodles". You're just refusing to translate directly into your own language, and there really isn't a problem with that.

So "can the west produce Anime?" Techinacally they've never done otherwise, as long as it's animated then the Japanese will use the word Anime to describe it.

Can the an American or Mexican make an animated series in the exact way a Japanese person would? Maybe if they were born and raised there, but otherwise everyone will always add something from their own culture and it's perceptions to the mold.

Korra is not the same as Cowboy Bebop nor does it have to be. Both are different works, which you can like or dislike freely.

Sis:Champagne can only be named champagne if it originates from the Champagne area. Anime can only be named Anime if it originates from the Japan. HOWEVER, that still doesn't mean that others aren't allowed to make it. They're just not allowed to name it so.

Agreed. Basically, American's can easily make something that very strongly resembles anime in every conceivable way, but it wouldn't technically be anime; just an American cartoon that looks like one. With that it mind, it really doesn't make the slightest damn difference.

Except the fact that the only people referring to Japanese animation as "Anime" seems to be Western Fans. There is no politics behind anime, no developers, writers, producers ect. who lobby for the term to be legally bound to the meaning "Animation of a certain style coming from Japan".

You can't equate Anime to Champagne or Bourbon because the creators of anime don't even themselves use that word (unlike champagne producers or bourbon distillers who regularly tell us that the only "real" champagne or bourbon comes from this or that area of some country).

I really don't agree with this article at all.Anime isn't a genre defined by its tropes or visual style. The word simply refers to Japanese cartoons. You're not doing anything wrong if you're referring to anime as 'cartoons', but referring to western cartoons as 'anime' doesn't make any sense.

I don't get why fans of the Avatar series are so eager to have it called anime in the first place.

Anime is simply a Japanese loanword used to refer to cartoons from Japan. Using the word to mean anything else is nonsensical, since you might as well just use the word 'cartoon' then and ditch the word 'anime' entirely. Unless you want to start excluding a bunch of Japanese cartoons from the label, that is.In Japan, the term simply means "cartoon", the same way the word "katana" actually just means "sword" in Japanese. Calling Legend of Korra an anime makes as much sense as calling a flammenschwert a katana.

Anime is a form defined by a common artistic style and visual language, a shared collection of tropes and themes, and perhaps most importantly, a similar canon of influences.

place one protagonist with powerful and unique abilities. Next, pour in an exceptionally talented team of supportive friends. Then, add a seemingly impervious villain who aims to remake the world according to his own warped ideals. Throw in a few dashes of strong themes like family, friendship, fear, and death, blend it all together with plenty of beautiful visuals and flawless voice acting.

Seriously? That's how anime is defined? Has the author only watched the mainstream shonen stuff?I wonder how Hellsing fits into that. Or how about Baccano. Higurashi? Mitsudomoe? Even Lucky star only fits the 'friendship' qualifier. I guess Usagi drop fits because it's about family?

The canon of influence actually involves a lot of western material, Disney cartoons for example.

What the avatar series has done is use a particular visual style that doesn't appear all that often outside of anime. Anime is not defined by this visual style though, it's simply a common aesthetic within the "genre".Why not call Peanuts an anime? Its visual style is certainly similar enough to Sazae-san, and the themes aren't all that different from stuff like Lucky star.Calling it anime is like making a film with a lot of choreographed dance scenes and calling it a "Bollywood movie".

My point is that if you no longer restrict anime to refer to Japanese cartoons, it will just refer to cartoons in general, and we already have a perfectly good word to use to refer to cartoons.

Pretty much this: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

Except the fact that the only people referring to Japanese animation as "Anime" seems to be Western Fans. There is no politics behind anime, no developers, writers, producers ect. who lobby for the term to be legally bound to the meaning "Animation of a certain style coming from Japan".

You can't equate Anime to Champagne or Bourbon because the creators of anime don't even themselves use that word (unlike champagne producers or bourbon distillers who regularly tell us that the only "real" champagne or bourbon comes from this or that area of some country).

I can equate them, because the distinction between what is anime and what isn't, and the destinction between what is champagne/bourbon and what isn't, is based purely on geographical location. Anime may not be a protected, officially reserved term like champagne or bourbon, but that really has no bearing on the point being made: anime is what we call cartoons from Japan. If it isn't from Japan, it isn't an anime. This may not be officially codified, but that is what the word "anime" means to most westerners.

As a side note, all cartoons from Japan are animes, including the ones that don't have the standard anime aesthetics (square eyes, no nose etc.)

Okay, well this is a complicated issue. On it's surface the big question here is simply whether someone can produce animated works for a teenage or even adult/young adult audience, and the answer is yes. When it comes the look of anime, which is highly stylized, it's no differant than choosing to paint or draw in a specific style. So the answer is "yes" that anyone can produce Anime.

What might enrage fans, is that Anime was always pretty much American, which was one of the reasons why it was able to penetrate the US market so well. Most of Japan's ideas, themes, and material, along with most of it's culture, were pretty much taken from the US after World War II. Animation was an easier and cheaper format to work with than live action video and movies, so a lot of ideas for a younger audience, or playing around with science fiction and fantasy tropes were created as animation, something that actually worked pretty well. A lot of parallels can be drawn between anime and those ultra-low budget, high concept, C-grade science fiction movies, right up to and including the use of female eye candy to help sell the product. Over the years I've read quite a bit about it. This is not to say that Japan didn't have a film industry (it did, and does) but that it embraced what was arguably a US cast-off technology that had been relegated to a very specific role (entertaining children) and pretty much turned it around to entertain older children. As things stand, despite pretensions by fans, most Anime is NOT intended for adults (the exceptions stand out, or are pornographic), but is developed for a higher "mental age level" than most US animation. It also stands out ironically because according to other things I've read your typical US TV show (not just kid's toons) is developed for a mental age level of like 9 or 10. Despite the content, your typical kid really has no problems sitting down and understanding what is going on during your average prime-time TV drama. Anime generally hit the US "nerd" market in part for not only looking like kid's cartoons to those not paying attention, but because it was over the heads of the mainstream audience in the US. About the third time someone starts prattling on explaining how we have magic interfacing with nano-technology through blood sacrifice (a key plot point, which things revolve around) most kids, and even adults will give up on it calling it "stupid" (which in this case means "not getting it" or not being able to get it while putting their brain firmly in neutral like most entertainment material), which meant like science fiction and a lot of fantasy it became nerd fodder, despite not being all that deep. I honestly don't think it's a matter of Americans being dumber though, I think it comes from the expectation of entertainment to do all the work, and not require one to actively engage at much of a mental level. The program doing all the work, while you just relax (so to speak) which is another subject entirely.

At any rate if you were listening to anime creators, voice actors, etc... when Anime started to seriously penetrate the US market, they used to have interviews following the features on VHS tapes and such, you'd notice a lot of it comes down to how American the entire thing is, and where all the ideas involved came from. An example would be "Lodoss Wars" being inspired directly by Dungeons and Dragons and American RPGs. The same could be said of a lot of things. Even "Gundam" traces it's origins back to the 1920s and 1930s with pulp era science fiction protaganists using armed EVA suits and vehicles. The basic idea simply being "well what if the EVA suit WAS the Vehicle, and was heavily armed, and instead of defense against the occasional predator or space anamoly these guys were seriously making war with them".

I think it could be argued that even as a technicality, Anime can be produced by either Americans (since we're arguably the soul of the entire thing), or Japanese who put the pieces together and created a stylized form of art based around the needs of "on the cheap" animation.

I'll also say that I think there is some butthurt involved, both from the Japanese, and from American fans who like to tout this form of pop culture as part of some fantasy about how Japan is superior to the US and some kind of nerd utopia (which is hardly the case). Even if being covered on Nickelodean [SP] so far show like this one, and arguably "Avatar", sort of show the US doing what has been in the eye of man a Japanese phenomena, as well, or perhaps better, than they do, with what amounts to great speed (pretty much as soon as we started actually trying). Not surprising to be honest when you consider how much of Japanese pop culture (even the modern takes on Samurai and Ninjas, which is a complicated thing in of itself) is actually from us. To see a "Kid's Network" pretty much nail it perfectly shatters nerd illusions, and probably reminds Japan how much of itself is arguably from us, as if they needed another reminder. In terms of visuals, smoothness of animation, and similar things (again consider budgets) what the US produced between these shows is arguably superior to like 90% of what Japan has produced when aiming for this style/level of show. It was never a declared competition, but it probably brings to mind images of Japan aping Americans badly with their old "punk rock" bands and such, and the old "well, they're really big in Japan" snark of yesterday and everything that carried with it.

Such are my thoughts and observations, not that I expect many people here to react well to what I'm saying for a number of reasons.

To me, the big question at this point is whether or not animation is going to continue to progress in the US. Nickelodean has been showing what's possible, but really for animation to take off in the US it has to get off specialty kids networks. Truthfully I suspect we are seeing the seeds planted for animation to play a bigger role in entertainment for the next generation or two as I think these shows are planting seeds now, that probably won't really bloom until the current adult generation is past.

I think it's easier to keep the term anime to Japanese made. Not because a purist reason, but because its simpler when most of all Japanese animation is termed anime. There are many animes that have different drawing styles and writing. I mean the original astro boy seperates from much of the anime today. Coining some American animation as anime opens to the trouble of the widening styles that influence what will be anime in the future.examples: plus any thread we had on this site about generalizing anime

Herman Hedning's mace:I have question on this topic. The classical cartoon Animaniacs probably wouldn't be considered an anime, but some parts where animated in Japan. Does that mean some parts of Animaniacs are anime but others are not?

Tough call, but a great one to pick out. Remember having this discussion many years ago with a Japanimation wholesaler.

May even take it a step further and include some Disney stuff which, while not leveraging the art direction, did lift quite a few stories from Japanese media.

I am seeing a lot of "anime is a style" in the thread, which seems a little off... for me I tend to go with "anime" as it is generally understood is both an aesthetic coupled with a thematic. Certainly it is animation from Nippon. Many of the character designs from anime are really simple, use some basic psychology, and have some cultural significance. In this sense I may go so far as to say it's not a "style", rather it is an "approach".

Looking at animaniacs I think we clearly see the aesthetic, but not so much the thematic. On a personal note I don't have a problem putting animaniacs next to a Last Exile on the shelf, but I do consider it to be decidedly western.

If I were to relate it to food, there is a great restaurant chain called P.F. Changs in the states... which is a French spin on Mandarin Chinese cuisine. I don't call it "French" food, I do call it "Chinese" food. In this it is that the dishes, as served, are Chinese. Ultimately it's just French influenced Chinese food.

If the dishes where French, with Chinese sauces I would flip it right around... so going with this, I tend to say it is "whatever the overall theme is", is "what it is" as a matter of convenience.

When I see something trying to get around "what it is", by insisting on being defined as "what it is not", it's normally an indicator that the product is being marketed rather than created to "be" that way.

I put Batman and Animaniacs (both WB I think) as both good, solid works. There are some animation parallels with Japanese animation, but they seem distinct enough to be their own things, and certainly "thematically" they are consistent with themselves. Good is good...

Avatar... and this other thing... I dunno about all that. I always got the impression that Avatar went the way that it did because it was pseudo Asiatic thematically, and the aesthetic kind of carried that theme (Asian art aesthetic = Asian Theme). I figure it is the same way with this other thing, Asiatic or Indian or something...

If ya make it look like anime maybe the anime kiddies will eat it up too without knowing the difference? Looks like marketing to me. So as above... that's what I am going to call it.

I think the old "can America make anime" and "can Japan make American Cartoons" isn't based on geography. Like someone else said it's just a style, it's like the old debate of Western and Japanese Roleplays. You don't have to make it in Japan or make it in America/Europe for it not to be a Western or JRPG. If they stick to the art style and themes of anime, then sure America can make anime and Japanese can make "American Cartoons". Location really doesn't matter to me.

What I like about Japanese animation is that it reflects usually Japanese sensibilities. American animation can look similar, but doesn't even come close to Japanese animation because it does not reflect the the sensibilities because of the cultural differences between the makers.It may be subtle, but when watching the differences puts it out of place.

There is an awful lot of good south korean animated shows and films which are certainly considered as anime. Let's not pretend that it's a Japanese monopoly. However there is a certain bias when talking about "western" produced art and motion animation. There is a perception that western art is always bad.

That disqualifies the whole argument from the start. and wether it was legally protected or not wasn't my argument. My argument was that the creators themselves don't use it (unlike any other style or genre or whatever the hell you want to say "Anime" is besides just a word used by japanese people for animation in general).

I couldn't give two shits about what a westerner thinks or calls something if it isn't the proper nomenclature. "Anime" as a term is basically just fanon taken to the most absurd extreme (ONLY western fans use it).

It's just a designation. Some may use it as a way to slight or trivialize American cartoons done in anime style, but in the end the Legend of Korra is fundamentally no different than Spongebob Squarepants in terms of designation. It's an American cartoon. There's nothing wrong with that. Calling it anime just confuses things. You can call it anime-style or whatever, but it's not anime. Whether or not Korean or Chinese cartoons should be designated "anime", now THAT'S a real debate.

English people struggle even to dub anime and Japanese games properly. 7 years watching anime i've yet to see a dub that as good as original. There is no way you will get good result out of English produced anime.